I have a question (a bit off topic). I’m not very familiar with D3 and D3S. What made a lot people upgraded their D3 to D3S?

…

I didn’t upgrade from D3, but I bought the D3S because of the low light capabilities.

I hardly use the video on it.

I believe the D4S is kind of the same deal. For people who didn’t get a D4, this is a great option.

I’m actually thinking of getting one.

longzoom

A bit less than 1 step of ISO improvement, in expense of some detailing.

Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ

Greater ISO capability.
The D3s made ISO 25600 usable. where the D3 hit its limit at 12800. The D3s also had a much deeper buffer.

Grigphoto

IMHO – more than 1 stop ISO, huge buffer, big improvement on flash handling, no purple fringing on standard LR profile in LR… I had D3 since November 2007 (first day of release) and upgraded to D3s the day D3s was released. To me – BIG difference…

Joseph Li

1 stop of better ISO….pretty noticeable if you use d3 or d700 at ISO 1600 and above (similar sensor i believe)

Jaz

Woot! Appetizing!

Paul

No obvious differences on the camera body.
Let’s see the specs.

Rafa R

I respectfully post the following: I am most curious about the D4s keeping two CF cards or keeping the XQD thing, what do you think?

(I certainly hope not to get trolled, but nowadays anything one says is excuse enough, so who knows)

Drazen B

Nothing wrong with your question.
Many would like to know the same, although I believe Nikon left the existing CF+XQD setup in the new D4S.

Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ

I hope they drop XQD and go for dual CF.
I really don’t like two different card slots, switching around two different cards and different card readers and such.
No one is using XQD, and thats the main issue.
I would love it if everyone just accepted XQD and start using it, because I hate the pins on CF and I think the XQD is a great card, but if nikon are just going to stick XQD in one of their cameras I rather just have another CF in my D4.
With my D4 and D800 setup I have to buy into 3 different card types, but I rather just have 1, or even 2.

vFunct

If they drop XQD, they should replace it with dual SDXC, instead of CF.

There are no advantages to CF cards over SD cards these days. CF format should be officially killed off. SD are more widely used, just as fast, reliable, and come in up to 256GB capacity like CF.

At least XQD has a higher-speed interface via PCI-Express.

MRomine

One advantage of CF vs SD. SD are easier to drop and loose.

phil

..the nightmare of every photographer

Spy Black

I’m surprised no one’s thought of putting 4 SDXC slots and having the option of rigging them up as a RAID Ø array. Wonder what kind of frames rates you’d get then.

neversink

I know you are not being serious, but Raid 0 configurations are dangerous as there is no mirroring and if one of the cards dies, you’ve lost all your data, because each image is spread across all four cards — approximately 25% in each card. However, Raid 10 array would be interesting. That is Raid 0 plus Raid 1. So you have mirroring (redundancy) plus more efficiency in the distribution of the image across two of the cards and exact redundant factor in the other two cards.
However, that brings up another technological can of worms. Getting Raid to work in a camera is costly. Then you have to read a minimum of two cards to access the image. Hopefully you won’t mix up the cards as your cards fill during a shoot and you have to insert new cards into the cameras. I can’t even imagine the frustration photogs, who are not always the most organized (I speak for myself) would have.
Then there are the bugs in the RAID software we would have to deal with.
And then of course the cost of the camera would be ridiculous.
But then of course, you were only joking, and I just wasted two minutes typing and thinking about this.

Spy Black

No, I’m dead serious. Yes a RAID Ø array can be potentially dangerous, but as you mentioned, you could have other RAID options if you have redundancy heebeegeebees. However if you want to take the risk and have full balls-out speed, a RAID Ø array is the way to go.

“Getting Raid to work in a camera is costly.”

Why? Perhaps only because it hasn’t been done before, but a raid chip can easily be fitted in an SLR like a D4, as could 4 SDXC cards.

“Hopefully you won’t mix up the cards as your cards fill during a shoot and you have to insert new cards into the cameras.”

Considering the space taken up by CF and XQD cards, you could easily implement a cassette that houses the 4 SDXC cards. Then you merely swap cassettes. It’s quite doable.

“Then there are the bugs in the RAID software we would have to deal with.”

RAID technology has been around long enough to be reliable. It’s not like this stuff was invented yesterday.

“And then of course the cost of the camera would be ridiculous.”
You mean it might cost something along the lines of a D4? Or a 1D?

zoetmb

Seems like overkill to me. I have never lost an image in all my years of shooting.

http://kyleclements.com/ Kyle Clements

a 4 card RAID 0 would mean 4X the risk of failure. a 4 card RAID 0+1 would be the better option: speed *and* redundancy

NoMeJodas

Agreed.

BTW RAID 0+1 belongs to the past and should be replaced by RAID 1+0 whenever possible. In a 4 disk configuration RAID 1+0 vs 0+1 won’t make a difference but with 6 or more disks, the number of the disks that can fail without altering the whole RAID unusable will be higher with RAID 1+0 than with 0+1. With 1+0 you’ll also get better performance from the RAID in degraded state (one or more disks have failed).

Spy Black

I say once you put RAID capability in a camera, give you the option to take whatever risk you want. Either going for redundancy and play it safe, or go for sheer speed if you want to take the risk. Easily doable with existing RAID technology.

umeshrw

Reading all this discussion I have a question. Isn’t current 2 cards backup option in cameras somewhat the same as redundancy one?

Spy Black

Well, redundancy only. RAIDs, depending on how they’re configured (such as RAID 5), can allow data retrieval even if you have hard drive failures, while still allowing for increase read and write speeds. RAID Ø, while it doesn’t have redundancy, has the highest read-write throughput.

NoMeJodas

RAID 0 configurations involving removable media like SD cards are never a good idea.

First, the content of the SD cards that are part of the RAID 0 will not be accessible outside the camera. This will force you to use USB cable or WIFI to copy the pictures to the PC.

Second, if one decides to swap SD cards during shooting without copying the images to the PC first, one must be very careful in keeping the cards together, otherwise the data on them can’t be restored. Not very practical solution.

dgr

Faster and bigger internal flash would do the trick. Even dedicated 4GB worth would go a long way. That would be plenty before it would need to get offloaded to the cards and would matter less on what type of cards used. Yes it introduces another point of failure and of course this would also require more battery power as well but I think it would be a worthwhile tradeoff. I have no idea what they are currently using for cache in these cameras.

NoMeJodas

True. But if one has to use USB/ WIFI anyway to transfer the photos, why not implement a very fast internal storage solution, like how Apple did to the MBP and add USB3 and WIFI to the camera?

NoMeJodas

I just realized now that you are suggesting the same internal solution in addition to the card slots. I was thinking of removing the card slots to find space for the internal flash storage. Anyway it should be doable with today’s technology.

Guest

Agreed. Won’t happen for a while but i see no reason why a camera couldn’t or shouldn’t use a PCI-e SSD identical to what you find in a Macbook Pro, they are small enough and i’d imagine clear the buffer faster than any card. 256GB internal storage would be a groundbreaker. Transfer to SDXC for offload or plug into camera over thunderbolt.
But we’ll probably all be riding hoverboards before that kind of revolutionary innovation comes our way.

Spy Black

Depends on how you implement it. Considering how much space the present cards take, a 4 SDXC cassette is an option. Simply swap cassette when needed. USB 3 could also (and should be by now) an additional transfer option.

http://loewald.com/ Tonio Loewald

Well put. Although instead of RAID 0, I’d simply write whole files in parallel to multiple cards, instead of writing 1/4 of four files to each card, write each file to a different card — much less dangerous; you could also have options like write three files to three cards, and three JPGs to one. The other alternative is just giving up on these “cards” and putting in a slot for a small SSD (or two). As I think I mentioned in another post here, a 1.8″ SSD can do 300-500MB/s and they’re cheaper per GB than XQD as far as I can tell.

Spy Black

Well, the whole point of suggesting the RAID Ø array is sheer speed. This could be used for either high-speed still shots or 4:4:4 color 4k video, for examples.

http://loewald.com/ Tonio Loewald

RAID will give you more speed for video but simply storing whole files in parallel will give just as much speed for stills. Black Magic is able to store Prores 4:2:2 on a single SD card so you could probably do 4:4:4 using 2x paired raid-0 and still have redundancy. The bigger point we’re both making is that the camera makers need to start thinking of the computer part of the camera as a *computer* or give up and replace all their circuitry with an iPhone/Android dock and let the professionals get the job done.

Spy Black

Prores is a lossy format however. I believe it’s Mac-centric as well.

http://loewald.com/ Tonio Loewald

Prores is an Apple format, but it has free and open source implementations on other platforms and can easily be transcoded into other formats. Yes, it’s lossy, but so are most practical video formats (just as many RAW formats are also lossy). 4K60p 12-bits per channel lossless is 2.2GB/s.

Spy Black

Well, you could implement lossless compression as well. However format is secondary to the medium. At least on this topic. My suggestion of the RAID Ø array is overall, to use with video and still as needed.

Actually, I was just thinking along the same train of thought. I’m surprised no one has thought of implementing a RAID Ø array into something like a CF card before. You could have a little DIP switch on the side that would allow you to configure it something like a RAID Ø or RAID 1Ø array.

You would still need the camera to have the capability to write at whatever write speeds would be available to you. This is why I thought it would have to be implemented by the camera manufacturer, in this case Nikon. Someone else may think it up before that tho [cough SONY cough]…

neversink

It’s probably been discussed at Nikon and other camera manufacturers. I’m sure the engineers and designers are almost as nearly creative as those of us who post here at NR. Yet they get paid more than we do here!!!

Spy Black

Probably, then again probably not. We don’t know for sure.

Allen Wicks

The latest cards at CES are able to transfer data at up to 500MBps. IMO the added complexity of RAID (complexity=risk) makes zero sense in a camera scenario as long as card capacities and speeds generally keep up with the ability of cameras to generate data.

In the unlikely scenario those kinds of speeds were to become inadequate IMO a simple protocol of write Pic1 to CardA, Pic2 to CardB, Pic3 to CardA, etc. would be far preferable to the inherent risk of RAID striping.

Note too that more complex operations tend to add latency issues.

Spy Black

Are those WRITE speeds? SUSTAINED write speeds? I doubt it. There will always be a speed advantage with a RAID Ø array, simply because you can use cards like the ones you’ve mentioned and make everything faster. It’s a personal choice for sure, but as someone else has pointed out here, I’m not alone in this train of thought:http://www.photofast.tw/products.asp?pid=61

neversink

Never say “always.”

Spy Black

Are you implying that the identical drives outside of a RAID Ø array are going to be faster?

neversink

No, what I’m saying is that technologies evolve. Some get abandoned and some get improved. Remember the floppy disk drive. Everyone laughed at Apple when they were the first to jettison the drive from their computers. People cried that living without floppy disks in the computer age was impossible and suicidal.
These memory cards have gotten faster. Just as thunderbolt is replacing USB and FireWire, their may be no need for rai as efficiencies improve in flash memory cards.
Perhaps, a raid card can be introduced with two or four built in cards, similar to hard drive raid arrays? Possible; but I don’t think the technology will go in that direction. The chance of failure is then multiplied.
At this point, memory cards seem to quite fast, and getting more efficient every day. They aren’t perfect, but Raid drives fail all the time.
Never say always as one never knows the technological advances and breakthroughs that are down the road. Take the D800 36mp sensor. Nearly everyone thought Nikon was making a big mistake, but only a few said that technology evolves.
In fact, one day Raid could go the way of floppy drives. who knows. Never say never, and never say always.

Spy Black

“Just as thunderbolt is replacing USB and FireWire, there may be no need for rai as efficiencies improve in flash memory cards.”

Other than Macs, I don’t see thunderbolt replacing USB. And it was USB that replaced firewire, not thunderbolt.

“Perhaps, a raid card can be introduced with two or four built in cards, similar to hard drive raid arrays? Possible; but I don’t think the
technology will go in that direction.”

For me there’s one significant advantage to CF. It’s size. In a time where everything get’s smaller and smaller the CF cards for me always were ideal on my D300s and I only grudgingly accepted the tiny SDHC cards on my D600. Often I don’t have a photo bag with me and while I can feel the CF cards in their protective case in my trouser pocket and are easily spotted in a backpack, the SD cards seem comparatively tiny. So I either keep losing the damn things or accidentally put them with them laundry. Fortunately so far only the empty ones … Yes I know: it’s my own fault and not that of Nikon or the card manufacturer but fact is: lost or washed not one CF so far

Felix

I think the biggest issue with CF cards is that it uses pins for connections. That is a major flaw. Pins are so 1990s. I like that advantage of XQD card with its simple interface.

silmasan

I was going to bring up this issue. CFast also has different interface, right? So for me, either will do, from ergonomic/practical point of view.

Spy Black

In the studio I freelance in , photographers lose and misplace CF cards all time. Not sure what the real advantage is there.

neversink

I’ve never lost a cf card or an XQD or an SD card. however, I have had four CF cards go bad on me (although they were all older generations,) no SD cards ever went bad and one XQD card which went bad. Go figure. But given all the shooting I do, that probably isn’t too bad a percentage…. Wonder why the CF cards fail the most (at least for me?)

Guest

>There are no advantages to CF cards over SD cards these days.
Apart from sustained speed and better temperature control, none what soever.

Allen Wicks

I disagree. The handling and relative ease of loss make SD much less desirable than CF in a pro environment (except for those few both with small delicate hands and small cameras).

However the real point is that IMO we should have XQD, which is best in every regard. It will be a shame if the XQD format dies.

Joseph Li

CF certainly isnt dead…lexar just came out with a 3333x high speed CF card..
with that said i agree i rather have 2 XQD or 2 CF…not sure about XD..it’s just too slow even for the fastest ones in the market

Adam

Actually Lexar came out with a 3333x CFast card, which is used in even fewer cameras than XQD (0 vs 1).

From a technical point of view the parallel bus used on CF will have the inherent speed limit of all parallel busses, which is keeping all the lines in phase. Since a serial bus is the future for cameras, just like it has been for computers (internally parallel busses are gradually being phased out) the choice in the long run will be between CFast and XQD. It would seem since in the PC world storage is starting to move to PCIe based (like XQD) since SATA (like CFast) is not keeping up with speed advances in flash memory. To avoid having to make another format change in the future, using XQD for the next generation of memory card seems like the best idea.

Maji

Great explanation of a difficult techie matter. Thank you.

apollo

There’s one thing wrong in your sentence. XQD is used in 3 cameras nowadays.

Adam

Sorry, I should have made it clear I was talking about still camera, not high end broadcast cameras.

apollo

I was just fixing nothing serious!

marktim

All 3 cameras are D4’s. Correct ansver is “only 3 users use XQD”.

apollo

Oh, wow, such a GREAT joke. People who say that XQD is a useless piece of **** haven’t used it. It’s very great platform but it should be used more.

And want to hear something? Nikon D4, Sony FDR-AX1 and Sony PXW-Z100.

neversink

I also shoot the D800 and D4. I would rather go with XQD, because it is a much faster card in clearing the buffer. However, it appears, outside of Sony, no other company has committed to producing an XQD card. I remember reading somewhere that Sandiisk said they would not be producing XQD, but they would favor Cfast. Not sure where Lexar is on this, although companies can always change their minds.
What is interesting is that the D4 is still the only camera using XQD, which makes the card much more expensive than the other memory cards available, as it is produced in smaller amounts.
I doubt I am replacing my D4 though, just for a different card configuration, or minor upgrades. But the details will be out shortly on the improvements in the D4s. I am very curious how they might be improving AF, which is fabulous in the D4.

Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ

I’m perfectly fine with the 67 frame buffer I have with my old 60 mb/s CF cards.
It do clear much faster with the XQD, but I don’t really need that advantage, and thats me.
I would be perfectly fine with XQD if nikon but that card in the D800 too, but currently the D4 is the only camera in nikons lineup that uses XQD, so I wouldn’t miss it if it was gone in the D4s.
I think lexar is making XQD, not sure though.
I don’t think I will replace my D4 either. It does everything I ask for, and the D4s sounds just like minor improvments, which don’t really affect me.
I’ve been wondering about the AF improvment too, if they made any changes to the system, like more cross type points or maybe just -3 EV focusing and better tracking for higher fps?

neversink

I agree… It’s minor whatever card they have. It would be nice if the D800 and the D4 sported dual card slots with only one card. It would make things easier, but having two different cards in each camera body doesn’t raise my hackles.
One benefit of two different cards in the D4 is that the CF card is cheaper than the XQD card so you don’t need to purchase as many XQD cards to use as backup, if that is how you configure your slots.

Parfumeur

Lexar (aka Crucial, or Micron) has high speed and high capacity cards in XQD format, also to satisfy the needs of the videographers.

neversink

Thanks for clearing that up…. Wasn’t sure about that. It’s funny how Sony doesn’t even use XQD in their DSLRs (Je pense.)

Joven

If you look at where Sony cameras sit in the market place (aimed at newbies and enthusiasts), the XQD card is too expensive. Most people would have to buy a card AND card reader.

Sony needs to start operating at a severe loss to get these things out to market. That’s always been Sony’s issue; they want to develop new mediums, but they’re HORRIBLE about getting support for them, and supporting their own tech. If the Blu-Ray player hadn’t been in the PS3, I truly wonder how well it would sit in the market place today.

neversink

I’m surprised Nikon didn’t work with Lexar or Sandisk to develop theXQD or similar card. Oh well, I guess since Sony sensors are in some Nikon cameras it makes sense. You are right. Sony has a history of introducing technologies that fail: Beta Max, Memory Stick, Digital Audio Tape, Universal Media Disc, and I am sure the list goes on.
I hope, for us D4 users that XQD does not fall into this category.

Joven

Lexar makes XQD cards, but SanDisk wants no parts of it. I wonder if Nikon made an agreement with Sony when they made the D600 and D800 sensors that Nikon had to use XQD in one of its cameras.

zoetmb

Sony’s already been operating at a severe loss for years. Support and marketing is another issue.

Zeke

Why not let the customer decide by offering an XQD/CF version, a CF/CF version, and an XQD/XQD version? Photographers would dig this.

Before you reply with the predictable “because cost/tooling/inventory/qual/blah/blah/blah,” consider that never in manufacturing history has it been easier to produce product variations quickly.

You can order any laptop with different memory/drives/gpus/etc. For four times the money, you should be able to do the same thing with a D4.

Maji

I don’t think assembling a laptop is same as assembling a camera. The laptop is designed to be modular, so that the assembly can be like a Whopper… with or without onions, ketchup or memory/drives if you may. That is the difference and the bottleneck. I wish that they make a camera where I can order which sensor I want with it

Zeke

Laptops are as tightly packaged as any DSLR.

Laptop vendors offer a choice of options at different prices because the customers demand it and competition is fierce. We photographers, on the other hand, have grown accustomed to being offered no configurability at all, so we think of being offered a choice as somehow unnatural.

Imagine if a DSLRs were available with several buffer size options, media options, etc., at different prices. It’d be great. I think the reason it isn’t happening is entirely cultural, not technical. But as DSLR sales continue to collapse, maybe the culture will change.

Theodoros Fotometria

There are benefits in having 2 same cards and also (more benefits IMO) to have different cards. Those who use D4 do appreciate XQD, the card seems to be more reliable, faster and storage capacity can be huge, from that POV, having 2 XQDs seems an unnecessary overkill, while having the second card as CF, retains compatibility with the past and helps share the card with other cameras in a common project as well as having back up. I have to say, I appreciate XQD much more after I use the D4 more than I did before using it and (IMO) its good to have CF as well.

ola

Skip XQD.
For speed, what they really should do is to write every second image to the other card, thereby doubling (combining) performance.

Guest

So, you don’t believe in back ups?

ola

Why would this stop you from keep using the backup otpion? If you use backup, XQD will not bring any more performance, since you are backing to the other card type anyway. So your point is completely void.

Hi Rafa R,
There’s only one way XQD will succeed and that’s if Canon,Sony and Sandisk decide to use it.
Canon and Sandisk have shown no interest in it whatsoever, Sony made two cards, as did Lexar, and haven’t taken it any further.
Whether people like XQD over CF is irrelevant if the two big card manufacturers, Sandisk and Lexar, decide they’re not going to make them, or take it any further than two cards designed over a year ago.
Had Canon designed the 1D X with one CF and one XQD then maybe Sandisk would have seen a market, Lexar would have made more cards and maybe Sony would have made a camera that actually used XQD…but that didn’t happen.
There’s no way the D4s will be dual XQD. The design changes internally might be too diificult to switch to dual CF, Nikon might just leave it as it is for the D4s and rethink it for the D5.
By the time the D5 is being talked about maybe Canon will also be thinking about XQD for their 1DX replacement ?

MB

Sony started using XQD cards in professional 4K camcorders, and they started making XQD S cards that are 50% faster (180 MBps) so there are 4 cards currently available from them. So it seams there is certainly a future for XQD cards in broadcasting but I am not so sure how useful is all that speed in DSLRs today.

broxibear

Hi MB
As far as I know the original H Series XQD cards from Sony were replaced by the newer S Series cards you’re refering to, the newer cards include 4k compatibility.
Sony still make Memory Stick cards, how many new cameras use that ?
It’s more about Sandisk and Lexar, if there’s no viable market for them then they won’t make them…one flagship camera definitely isn’t viable.

clifflwms

That’s a tough one. I have a D4 and a D800, and of the 3 formats that I have to use, my favorites are 1) XQD 2) CF 3) SD, but I’m afraid that if no one else… (Canon/Sony/Sandisk) adopts the format, we may be left hanging, and prices may eventually go up… not down. I’d hate to see that happen, especially since XQD is actually superior in every way, but if no one uses it, then “superior” doesn’t mean much.

Hexagon Jr.

Where is the Df2?

phil

Next year.

With a revolutionary feature.

Video.

Tomislav Kovacicek

You mean Digital Fiasco 2?
Coming sooner than we think…

Steven Solidarios

Going to get this as soon as its available.

Chris Cheek

Man,I wish they would announce some more products for Nikon..When are they going to bring out the 135mm 1.8g..Long overdue..

Bob L

So are we going to get the specs for the D4s during CES or later?

Bob L

I would like to see a 400mm f/4

Kynikos

I think a 400 5.6 would sell.

Maji

There is a 200-400/4, or you can add at 2x on the 200/2 and get it. The 200/2 takes the TC very well. I think if Nikon develops a 400/4 or 5.6, and tries to make it optically better than the above two combinations, it will be expensive and bulkier where the advantage may be lost. I understand the advantages of using a naked prime, but this is not really a pressing need. A new 300/4VR and a 135/2VR perhaps is more important.

Comparing the back of the D4 with the D4s, it looks like the grip on the sub-selector and vertical multi-selector has been updated as well as the shape of the battery door (D4s battery door has curve on top).

lord eels

not sure about the battery door change could be the light but I think it’s the same.

DragonTesticle

D4s sensor-shift?

D600 Owner

no

George Kalogeris

am I the only one who NEED better video conveniences ?
* 1080/50p is a must nowadays
* 1080/25p recording in card while 1080/25p hdmi output
* Auto-ISO in M mode please…

Remedy

Clean excludes overlay. Get it?

George Kalogeris

Have you heard of a button called “info” ?
You press it, you get the overlay
You press it again and the overlay disappears.

It’s not innovation

Remedy

Ever seen a clean HDMI output? You can press whatever you want and it’s still clean. Get it? Or do You need some more time to process it?

George Kalogeris

ok mister,
I just want a clean/dirty button

lord eels

buy a real video camera, you cheapskate. because that’s what HD-SLR video is all about, being CHEAP.

how about the canon c300 for starters? there are dozens of real video cameras with real controls/interfaces/ports/codec support/built in ND/ergonomics that have great image quality AND great low light performance.

how can you not know that and be whining about video on a $6000 pro nikon? is it perhaps because you have never seen one and never will?

when I’m shooting a wedding and the video guy is using a freaking DSLR I sigh, because I know they are some cheapskate half-amateur.

because let’s get real, that’s what hdslr video is all about. low barrier to entry by cheapskate amateurs with rebels. sling that out a few years, and now those clowns are using 5dm3’s. lol. glad this is a canon thing and nikon doesn’t waste time and energy building stupid stuff like overpric

George Kalogeris

I totally disagree.
I own a d4 and it’s video is superb, in par or better than FS700.

The controls are my complaint as well as software glitches.
If someone doesn’t want video he can purchase Df

lord eels

well even the canon 1DC folks whine about poor video controls. you guys are never going to be happy with dslrs, they are designed for stills and always will be. so keep complaining until you figure out really video requires a real video camera, period.

thanks for propping up the used body market a bit tho.

JonahD4

I guess shooting in the same event as a cheapskate half-amateur speaks volume of your elitist mentality. I don’t disagree with your assessment that video sensors and form factors are what makes a good camcorder, no doubt about it. But some of us cheapskate amateurs are shooting with a rebel on the expensive wedding you shoot at to get a C300.

umeshrw

You are right about shooting wedding with a Dslr being a joke as it is not suited for that kind of fast and spontaneous work . What it shines at is for shortfilms , Documentaries and generally slow and planned work.It totally works for the poor filmmakers who want to save as much as possible at least loss of quality.

Pragmatic_NYC

Arri Alexa. Better in low light than any DSLR, and the farthest thing from cheap.

Guest

Alexa starts showing noise in the shadows at 800 ISO. A D4 blows it out of the water in low light. Its also about 10 times the size/weight.

Pragmatic_NYC

I’m not sure what sets you’ve been working on. They’re shooting at 800 and getting amazing DR and amazing quality on sets that I work on in situations that have me shooting at ISO 10000 with my D3s for stills.

Well typically DP’s tend to understand how to use lights and rate sensor performance so they should be getting amazing results.
I didn’t say the Alexa can’t shoot clean images at 800 ISO, thats what Arri themselves suggest as optimal- As long as there is enough light hitting the sensor. If there is a lot of shadow there will be noise at 800 due to underexposure. Its just a fact. Which i don’t think would be the case on a D4.

If we really want to talk apples to apples then sure, if you are shooting the next Scorcese movie or doing anything on a movie set buy, or more likely rent, an Alexa. Or a RED. Or a Sony f55.

But if you happen to be one of the millions of video shooters worldwide who doesn’t work in feature film or television or wherever it is all you stills shooters assume video geeks simply must be using their camera’s, then DSLR’s are part of the mix. Not because they are cheap. Not because a real video camera isn’t an option. But because sometimes DLSR’s are practical, be they inconspicuous, smaller and lighter, easier to travel with, better in low light, make a good crash cam, fit on an octocopter or whatever.

If Nikon could invent a time machine and go back 5 years and not put video in a D90 and somehow convince Canon not to do the 5Dm2 maybe they would. Until then most DSLR’s come with video as standard. That video is widely used. And people who use it are entitled to hope quality and features improve from one generation to the next.

Pragmatic_NYC

DSLRs make nice video. They do. But to use them you must be willing to make sacrifices in terms of workflow and ease of use. If those issues are jamming you up, buy a video camera. Oddly enough, video cameras are built to shoot video. Some of them are really good. A C300 isn’t going to break the bank.

Buy the tools you can afford and go crazy. It’s all about creativity, right?

Of course a C series camera isn’t good for stills. Just as a DSLR isn’t ideal for shooting video.

As a still shooter, I like my still cameras to be still cameras. The video function is great to play with, and you can do some nice work. But in terms of actual video production on a serious level for paying clients, a video camera is the better tool for the job. Is this really a point of contention?

Relative to a ~$90K Alexa (body only!), putting $18K into a C series system or a small Sony system is pretty reasonable, and the quality you get for that investment is pretty amazing. I know tons of guys who have at least one. It’s their job and that’s their tool.

Guest

Since there is no such thing as a perfect camera you do indeed sacrifice one thing or another no matter what you use. I could buy 10 C300’s it doesn’t mean its going to shoot 4k, or weigh less than a GH3, or go through a checkpoint unnoticed to cover a story in a political hot zone.
Sometime’s some people weigh the pro’s and cons of what they could shoot something with and choose a DSLR. Doesn’t mean they are idiots for not choosing something that shoots better quality. It means they chose to sacrifice quality for whatever reason. Peter Jackson had 48 Epics on the set of The Hobbit and i still spotted GoPro footage in the Desolation of Smaug. I’m sure he could of afforded a few C300’s too but maybe they were too big to fit inside a barrel tumbling down a river. Who cares what people are using their camera’s for or why. Do you really begrudge people who use video so much that you flat out deny Nikon should improve their products from one year to the next? Because that kind of outlook is going to effect stills too. Maybe we should all be writing to Nikon and letting them know they can shut down their R&D department, we’ll be happy to buy what they are selling today forever and ever.

Pragmatic_NYC

That was in interesting post, and I enjoyed reading it.

I don’t begrudge anybody anything, really. But I’m primarily a still photographer, and I’d like my still cameras to be, primarily, still cameras. It would be great if they could do both equally well, but at this point that isn’t a realistic expectation. And assuming Nikon has a limited R&D budget, I guess I’d hope that they’d spend it making their still cameras into the best still cameras they can be. (Which they probably are.) And if I have to plunk down money for a DSLR, well I guess I’d rather not be paying extra for video gadgetry since the primary purpose of the camera is stills. Make sense?

I stand by what I said before. If you’re going into serious video production, it’s probably not a mistake to get a serious video camera. They handle audio better, the lenses are designed for pulling focus, they’re aren’t the same type of recording limitations, the design is more suited to shooting video, they can be synced more easily. On and on and on. I’m not saying you can’t overcome these issues with a DSLR. You can. With money and a tolerance for extra stuff and extra steps.

http://davidhdennis.com/ David H Dennis

I’m getting nice video on my D4 at ISO 12800 on a regular basis. I doubt Alexa would be able to do that. In any event, I believe Alexa is completely incompatible with my spontaneous and handheld shooting style. It looks like its size and weight make a D4 look lightweight.

I’m thinking of getting a dedicated video camera, though, so I don’t have to constantly babysit it to makes sure it hasn’t gone over the 20 minute video limit. Can’t afford $80k for it, though. Sony’s new $2,000 4K camera looks intriguing, although I wish they’d release a more professional style camera at a relatively affordable price.

(Well, what I really want is a RED Scarlet as originally conceived, but that’s not going to happen ).

D

Pragmatic_NYC

The more we’ve researched video, the more crazy it gets. There are adapters out there that’ll make my Nikon glass work with a PL mount, but still lenses just aren’t ideal video lenses (focus throw, etc.) So while I have a 5D3 to play with video, when it comes time to really start production I expect to buy a real video camera.

I’d love the 5D3 sensor in a purpose built video camera. Dare to dream.

Ten times the price, too – and although I don’t know this for sure, I’d be very surprised if the lens options are suitable for anything but shoots that are carefully planed in advance.

So the D4 is pretty much the opposite of Alexa in every possible way.

D

Fifi

But not in a video mode! And watching Alexa picture on a high end monitor! Plus it does it in 16 bit raw format, which is practically HDR. It has ‘only’ 2K, but when upscaled to 4K still produces picture better than dedicated 4K cameras.

Anonymous Coward

Sony F5 / F55. Both 4k. F55 even has a CMOS global shutter.

Mansgame

Very ignorant. in many cases DSLR video is BETTER than dedicated video cameras.

Al Mumin

well, the main issue (as for me) is very soft reuslt in 1 and 1.5 crop modes. compare to 1920 crop (2.7) mode and you’ll get what i mean

Didn’t the firmware fix that?
I did some testing after the firmware and I had problems telling the difference between normal and 2.7 crop mode.
The normal mode and 1.5 crop is more prone to aliasing than 2.7 crop though.

Felix

Clean does mean clean. I prefer the clean HDMI output. When a Atomos Ninja is added, beautiful video appears!

DL

New battery maybe? D4 can do fewer shots than the D3/s/x and a lot of people left good reviews for a knockoff higher capacity battery they’ve been getting on amazon/ebay

lord eels

highly doubtful.

Radu

I have a D610 and still own my very first DSLR D3100..I like the pro feeling of a D3/D4 body but TBH if I had the money I think I’ll go for a cheaper D3s but in very good condition..the low light is amazing and 12 mpx are enough for that kind of speed

lord eels

thanks for sharing, but TBH, you aren’t the d-single-digit camera body demographic, and never will be.

metsatsu

Let’s hope that the improvement in D4S low light performance will be as awesome as the D3S. Imagine ISO 12800 looks like 3200!!

Remedy

Am I the only one that is really hoping to finally see a brand new AF module in this camera?! The current one is just refinement of the one presented with D3 in 2007. It’s about time for a new one! Or is it just me?

lord eels

d4 AF is already simply amazing, I welcome the improvement of course, but all this “same module” talk between the d4 and d800 really has me puzzled. I own both and the d4 AF performance is far far FAR superior. so if the modules are the same, AF performance must depend on other factors like the firmware and processor.

I couldn’t be happier with the d4 AF. it took a few firmware updates but it’s the best thing about the camera.

frankly, sad to say as a lifelong nikon shooter, but I am now scared of anything nikon calls “new”.

Remedy

It was the same story with D3 and D700, they shared the same AF module but even a complete novice would tell the difference. D3 was snappier, more responsive and it’s related with additional hardware like CPU etc.
I would love to have wider spread of AF points, improved tracking and even faster speed (not that it’s slow now).

Brian

I find it most interesting that the biggest question about the D4S seems to be if there is an XQD slot or not.

Remedy

That should give and idea that most of people commenting here never had D4 in their hands and they are definitely not a target consumer for D4s either, hence the bullshit that it’s least important floats so high.

Remedy

an idea*

I.S.

“never had D4 in their hands”
projecting?

Remedy

Been using it at work since quite some time (and when I say quite some time I mean since like 3 months after it was released). Facepalm much?

MyrddinWilt

Since most of the posters won’t ever buy a D4s, its the only thing that is going to affect them.

If Nikon jumps from XQD to the CFast format it is the end for Sony’s format. And that certainly looks like the right decision at this point.

CF is dead, there will be no new development. The speed is limited by the bus speed which cant be increased without a redesign. CFast is the redesign and it is not pin compatible. Right now there SDXC format cards that are cheaper and faster and higher capacity than all but a few of the CF cards and those will soon be passed.

SDXC is the format that is actually winning in the market. MacBooks come with an SDXC card slot, they can’t do CF without an adapter. Doing XQD requires the special Sony dongle only Sony make.

A 128GB SDXC card can be had for $75 right now so I can’t see any reason to insist on support for legacy CF cards. I have been using CF for over ten years, since the Coolpix 950. But I don’t exactly have much use for my 8MB cards any more. And yes that is MB not a typo.

anon

While having two of the same card type would be nice, it’s so insignificant of a PROBLEM that i just never understood all the griping about it in the D4. The XQD card in itself is a GREAT format, and if no company makes a change to start use it, then no one ever will.. Kudos to Nikon for doing so. I mean I can’t imagine anyone using a D4 has had to change their shooting style or workflow that much if at all when they moved from the d3/s except for the fact they have a new card and new reader to hook up. Big deal… Not buying the d4 because of that alone is ridiculous. I know some people say to just put two XQDs in it and forget the CF… but XQDs aren’t cheap and for a working photographer, replacing ALL their CF cards with XQDs can be very pricey especially just after upgrading a camera. The 2-type combo allows photographer to adapt to the new format in time, not replace immediately… I think that was smart on Nikon’s part.

Personally the thing i don’t like about the D4 (and every single nikon dslr for that matter) is the lack of matching controls in portrait mode. I use DOF Prev all the time and i’m in portrait orientation over 50% of the time. What’s the point of the vertical grip if you can’t use it the same way? This may seem minor to some people, but i find this type of a thing more disappointing than the D4 image quality, AF, card slots, etc. Why?.. because those other things are already amazing… Missing controls, not so amazing. The d4 has the Fn button on the vert grip by the shutter release, but to me, that’s a cop-out on a 6000 dollar camera. Put is under the lens mount so it’s the same as landscape… Plus i’m not a huge fan of the multi-selector and sub-selector inconsistency… Not a huge deal, but just another of those little things. Granted I’ve not taken the time to program them differently than stock setting which may help that a lot.

lord eels

couldn’t agree more with every word. forget the bubble gum and shoestring hobbled-together, 14fps of the canon 1dx, portrait grip control sameness is what I envy about the body.

Thom Hogan

Not sure I agree that the two-card solution is an insignificant problem.

The D4 is a performance camera. Indeed, it’s supposed to be the highest performance camera. What I and others find is that with a CF in slot 2 the camera can and will slow down from what it’s capable of. If you’re using Backup or RAW+JPEG, it can be very measurably slower (especially with buffer filling), if you use the spillover option, the camera will slow when you hit the limit of the XQD card.

In essence, Nikon compromised the performance by including the CF slot, or else you have to consider the camera a single slot camera. I don’t see that as insignificant. It’s one of those design compromises that I think Nikon gets wrong more often than not. Either it’s performance or not, either it’s retro or not, and so on. My contention is that they’d sell more product by not putting these compromises into them.

As for the button placements, I agree with you. Though I’d point out that the D4 at least tries to replicate the backside of the camera placements reasonably well. But a hand position is a hand position. It should be the same on both grips, and you should access the same types of controls the same way, too. Anything short of that is indeed a problem.

Maji

Thom,

I really like your analyses and your insights. I read your blog on a regular basis. However, I feel that you have been picking on Nikon lately and trying to nitpick their decisions. I am starting to feel that Nikon may have spurned you about something that has made you “pick” on Nikon and their decisions. Do you really think Nikon put those cards in without thinking the process through? I can understand in lower end cameras, marketing rules. But for these highest end performers, designers and Nikon sponsored photographers have a lot of input… at least, that is what I heard. Perhaps I am wrong, and it won’t be the first or the last time.

Thank you for your general insights on photography as always. They are a pleasure to read.

decisivemoment

I don’t really see where there’s a nitpick problem here. I do see Nikon going through one of their cyclical phases of loss of direction, rather like the foot-dragging in the late 1980s and early 1990s on AF technology, and the “DX has replaced FX” rationalizing of the D2H and D2X (which I believe eventually led to Nikon executives getting canned, and the successful D3 and D300 prioritized). And Hogan is calling them on it — as I recall he did with the DX/FX mistake of the early 2000s.

And the timing is especially important because what the camera industry as a whole is going through right now as of about the last eight months or so is not just cyclical. It’s the end of 50 years of exponential growth. And we don’t want our favorite camera brand to be making mistakes at such a critical moment.

Maji

I understand the monumental shift going on in this business. However, I still stand behind my assertion that Thom appears to be nitpicking on Nikon as if he has a bone to pick. I am sorry, but that is how I perceive it and it may not be the case.

Thom Hogan

I’m not spurned by Nikon (at least not any more than I’ve ever been ;~).

I’m a perfectionist and a futurist. It bothers me greatly that Nikon is making suboptimal decisions that now have the potential to severely limit them in what they can do in the future. The analogy I used was that they’re on the straightaway and kept the accelerator to the floor long after they should have started adjusting for the upcoming hairpin turn. It’s the reason why we have D3100, D3200, D3300, D5100, D5200, D5300, D7000, and D7100 cameras all in stock and selling new, for example.

The problem is that Nikon is now mostly a camera company. The flat and declining parts of the camera market now inhibit them from growing further when they make incorrect decisions. Indeed, there’s great potential for those decisions to turn a profitable company into an unprofitable one. That would be bad for Nikon, and bad for me since much of my livelihood centers around Nikon. I’m not shy, I’m willing to say the sky is falling if I think the sky is indeed falling. Because my career was based at looking five or more years forward, perhaps I’m calling that a little early, but the trend line seems clear to me.

As for Nikon-sponsored photographers, there’s always been an “in” crowd versus an “out” crowd. I’ve watched over the years at what it takes to get on Nikon’s “in” side. I’m not willing to do that. As to how much they influence Nikon’s design decisions, not as much as you might think. Too much of Nikon’s decision making happens far before any photographer ever sees or handles a prototype, and it’s generally too late to make any major change at that point.

Whereas Leica and Fujifilm have brought some of their more dedicated pros into their R&D labs and openly discussed both current and future products and what they were doing right and wrong in terms of helping the photographer, I’m not really aware of Nikon doing that. They tend to rely upon “relay” of information, partly because of the language barrier. So a real issue generally gets flagged by someone at NikonUSA, raised to the NikonUSA President (who’s Japanese), who relays it a management level to HQ, who then relays it down into R&D. It’s an inefficient and slow process. In a few cases where I’ve used the “system” to get word on something back to Japan, I’ve gotten translations back into English that weren’t what actually I had asked or questioned.

For example, a number of years ago there was a Hollywood photographer that was doing timelapse for a popular TV show who asked me why the intervalometer only went to 999, and could we get that changed. It took two tries to get the correct question into and understood by R&D, to which the answer was “no, we only allocated enough bits to hold values to 999.” Eventually, we got the Timelapse feature, but that doesn’t exactly take care of the problem ;~).

As for the choice of XQD, Nikon is a bit like Apple, in that it tries to anticipate future technologies that solve real problems in the core designs. One problem that modern cameras have is internal bandwidth. The faster you unload the memory, the more it can be used by the other components that touch it. But XQD might be Nikon’s Firewire ;~(.

broxibear

Hey Thom,
Why do you think Nikon took a leap of faith with XQD, they obviously had some concerns hence one CF and one XQD ?
I think it has less to do with Nikon and more to do with Sandisk and Canon saying no thanks, that in turn made Lexar rethink, and then Sony themselves didn’t want to put it in their flagship cameras…or any cameras for that matter.
I get the impression Nikon were reassured by Sony,Lexar and Sandisk about the new format, then they all pretty much backed out.

Thom Hogan

Okay, you’re Nikon. You know that you need bandwidth everywhere you can find it. Imagine, for instance, a 24mp camera that can shoot at 24 fps. That’s one heck of a lot of bits flying around. Current CF is already maxed out and requires a rethink to get faster. SD isn’t fast enough and not likely to get there. So what do you do? You look for technologies that’ll move you forward.

Despite my supposed negativity about Nikon, looking forward at technologies is one thing they do pretty darned well. ;~)

So you work with SanDisk and Sony to use some existing bus technologies in a new card form. You even go to the CF standards committee to get it ratified. Afterward, SanDisk backs out (reasons still unknown). Now it’s just you and Sony. Sony needs such cards for their video endeavors (actually, everyone does).

I suspect that it’s another Betamax/VHS type argument. We’ve had tons of these in Japan. For all their cooperation, when it comes down to intellectual property that might drive a few sheckles in royalties, Japanese electronics companies fight like demons. No one seems to want to let one-sided standards happen there.

The SanDisk pullout is worrying. It potentially sets up yet another format war in Japan, and format wars in Japan generally don’t mean good things for consumers.

Maji

Thank you Thom for taking the time to reply. Again, very much appreciated as now I am clear about your thought process.

anon

Yes I agree that a CF would slow the overall performance. HOWEVER… Most people complaining about it are saying they should have with 2 CF cards, not 2 XQD cards, which is basically telling me that people’s gripe isn’t with the speed but with the consistency of having 2 of the same vs the inconsistency of 2 different. The D5 will most definitely have 2 of the same type again.. either CFast or XQD, whichever one survives, but I think for a adoption of new tech while keeping tried and true old tech available was a good choice to get people into using XQD without having to replace everything. They could have put 2 XQDs in, but i think more D4 owners may have gone for D800s.

Remember… The D4 is not only sold to those needing to shoot 500 pictures in 1 minute, but to others that need features other than its FPS… As a wedding photographer primarily, the things much more important about the D4 are low light AF speed/accuracy and incredible high ISO performance. Occasional fast bursts are needed, but only for a moment or two. Certainly not needed long enough to need such fast cards to offload a full buffer. Only a select few D4 users actually fill the buffer. I would guess that’s even true for most sports photographers.

So i get your point that yes the CF slows the XQD in backup mode. But does that matter to the majority of the users? I dunno… Maybe to some… it certainly doesn’t bother me… But i also agree that Nikon has made a lot of weird, maybe poor, choices in the past year+. I just don’t think the D4 card slots is one of them. I suspect the D4s will have the card layout as the D4, but I guess we’ll see.

Thom Hogan

I guess my response is this: do you really want to design your top-of-the-line camera in a dumbed down form because some users might not need the performance?

So let me ask it a different way: does Ferrari or Porsche put speed limiters on their top-end models in Europe?

Nikon News

We have incorporated all the improvements that our customers have asked for the current Nikon D4, and we have the honor to present the new Nikon D4s.
The improvements are as follows:
– 0.5 more fps.
– Continuous quiet mode.
– Improved auto WB.
We want $500 more for this camera.
Thanks,

Nikon

Jan

sound like D610?

Kynikos

D610 launch price < D600 launch price
(in N. America at least)

Mansgame

D610 was a bug fix plain and simple.

UA

- ISO +1 stop

But what’s bad in that? If you have D4 there’s no reason to hurry up and update. Or if you have planned buying D4, now you will get the most up-to-date technology from Nikon for about same price, or you can buy cheaper D4 or even cheaper used D4.

As opposed to what? I’m all for styling, love the Df but what do you mean by this? It’s a DSLR style because it’s a DSLR. Something like the Canon Cx00 series is a different style but then again it’s not a DSLR.

Mansgame

Mirrorless will take over but after years of research the A7 is the best that Sony could do which while nice still lags greatly in AF and only a handful of available native lenses exist for it. That tells me that it will be a long time before the pro lineups with Nikon will go mirrorless.

Neopulse

Not even a handful Sony has.

TrainedByShaolin

Until it looks like an iPhone, I’m not buying!

Pat Mann

My vote goes for dual XQD for the high-speed cameras, including the D400 when released. 4k video with low compression in small devices should also demand something of this capability, and I would expect more adoptions in certain types of gear if Nikon hangs on, unless there’s an even better solution just around the corner that hasn’t been released yet. If there’s another format in the wings, perhaps XQD’s time has come and gone.

Neopulse

One can only hope for dual-XQD slots. Chances are it will still be CF+XQD.

Jan

Someone will post photo of genuine UFO before D400 released.

broxibear

There’s a small redesign of the joysticks along with the multi selector at the back, apart from that I can’t see anything obvious that jumps out.
Peter (admin) do we know if Nikon are going to talk about specs at CES ?

http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

I do not think they will talk about the specs – at least not officially.

broxibear

CP+ is on Feb 13th, it’s a few days after the start of the Sochi Winter Olympics…sounds like a good official launch date to me ?

There’s bound to be a few at the Superbowl on the 2nd of Feb too.

http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

Yes, the official announcement should be in February and shipping should start in March.

pier

Dear NR,
is it just me or I don’t see any sign of when the specs of the new D4S will be released? Any clue?

http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

See my previous D4s post.

jk

all I have been saying about this camera was spot on , I said it 4 weeks before this announcement when I went to one of 4 Nikon service centers in my area.

but I personally do not really care for the S version but X.
I actually want a Df mk2 with 60p at hull HD or better 4k.
I love the Df after actually used it but I did not buy it because it did not have proper video at all.

The Looker

Some of those presentations sound interesting. Is there a way to watch them online somewhere?

rough

Just saw this on indiegogo, wireless tethering for Nikon DSLR, worth a look?

nobody will see your 4k masterpieces for 7 years according to the CEO of sony. so why bother?

TrainedByShaolin

Unless you actually buy a dedicated 4k video camera….

Joven

I know your comment was tongue-in-cheek, but it’s a valid point. 4k video is being rushed to market like 3D video was/is being introduced.

It’s expensive, doesn’t yield major returns, and there’s not a lot of content for it. That’s not even getting into the aspect of viewing distance. Most people can’t tell the difference between 1080p and 720p if the tv isn’t over 50″.

The best implications for 4k video right now is the movie theater experience, and TVs over 80″.

Shooting 4K gives you a lot more flexibility in post if the delivery format is HD. You can zoom, pan and stabilize without losing resolution.

Abraham Collins

Downsampling, for now. Shoot a native 1080p video and a 4k video simultaneously and compare the footage after reducing the 4k down to 1080p. You’ll be shocked at how soft, noisy, etc. the native 1080p footage is.

Jonathan

Why bother with 4k at all. Personally I think we should just go straight to that 33Mpx video they were working on in Japan. Now that would be cool. 4k has great dynamic range, but that 33Mpx stuff should be amazing.

Mark

So what does this mean for the chances of the D400 on Jan 17th? Now that they only announced working on this D4s?

iamlucky13

I’ve seen it suggested that the announcement is because pre-production D4s’s will be in the hands of some pro’s at the Olympics next month, so instead of letting the rumors play around, why not just be up front about it?

In other words, the D4s is beyond just working being on, and presumably near release.

I’ve also wondered if when they made the last batch of long-lead parts for the D4 production lines, they underestimated either the remaining demand or the amount of time getting the D4s into production would take. Either way, the recent rumors suggest the supply is low, so it would be wise indeed for Nikon to let the potential buyers of one of their top models know what’s going on.

A general announcement to all: stop droning on about the socalled D400!!!

Jan

Who are you? The god of opinions?

Michiel953

And you’re the god of instantly right guesses…

broxibear

Here’s a quick side by side, they’ve definitely changed the shape of the card door…why bother changing it if the slots were the same (one CF, one XQD) as before ?

lord eels

wow. def right. good, the d4 door wasn’t so great.

TheInconvenientRuth

To make space for the third XQD slot.

TheInconvenientRuth

OK, seriously now, it is -VERY- obvious. In the D4, you have the QXD on the left, the CFII on the right. Bottom left is the card door lock/latch. If there were two QXD cards, there would be no need to change the door, no need to retool the main body and make a new door. However, if you install two CFII cards, you have no space in the current configuration. You need space for a second CFII card AND eject button. The only way to do this is to move the second eject button to the top left, where the door is now bigger. Then the lock can stay where it is now. Therefore, I think we can be 99.99% sure the D4s pictured here has 2x CFII. If it were dual QXD, there would be plenty of space inside, no need to change the door. Unless they put something else in there we don’t know about yet…

Either that or straight back to the D3 design, which looks very similar to the D4s door

broxibear

Yeah, as I said why bother changing the door on the D4s when the only other visible change to the whole body is the rubber AF nipples…and those aren’t prt of the magnesium shell anyway ?

neversink

i can’t tell anything from the pic as to what is behind the changed door. Hope they didn’t get rid of XQD, because then I am going to consider selling my D4, as it will be obvious that XQD cards will be discontinued. I hope not. That will definitely make the D4 with less quickly. Say it ain’t so.

broxibear

I wouldn’t worry about it neversink, Sony still makes memory sticks and other older cards, I don’t think they’ll stop making XQD…trying to find them on stock at retailers may prove difficult though.

Lubos

From Nikon point of view, this is pathetic. To show something that is in development without any addition of releasing any D4s data, or even ask photographic community for their wishes and recommendations, simply to have open communication with future customers. Wouldn’t that be helpful?

Vlad Dusil

How do you know Nikon hasn’t been working with pros (under NDA) to improve on the D4?

TheInconvenientRuth

I know for a fact that they always do. And if the feedback is strong enough, they WLL make last miute changes if it is important enough and economically viable.

Nikon

so what we know so far is the improvement over the D4 is the “s” at the end. Form wise, everything is exactly the same…hilarious

papundek

Form?
Where did Nikon state any changes in “form”?

Did you react the same when D3S was announced, you bozo?

Michal

According to Ren Kockwell :

Forget the D800 if you’re a working professional; the 16MP of the D4s is more than enough for anything. I usually set my D4s down to its medium (9MP, 3,696 x 2,456 pixel) resolution anyway to speed up my post processing.

this Guy makes my giggle every time… and I’m so addicted to his fairy tails that I still visit his site at least once a week just to have a laugh…

he is such a weirdo !

Michal

Drazen B

No point hiding it, you’re one of those KR fans who can’t stay away from his site, admit it

John

I’ll admit it. (first step to recovery)

Hi, I’m John and I am a krholic.

lord eels

he basically just reposted the D4 review and substituted D4s everywhere

Michal

if you read his post in detail he sounds like that he already has one at home for the last few days…

bless him !

neversink

I’ve never given KR’s site much thought, but I cannot believe that he claims to have a D4s in hand. He talks about how great it feels. yet he also claims he doesn’t know what is behind the card door!!!!!
KR seems to be more of huckster than anything else. Thought he was just an egomaniac, but it seems his review is complete nonsense. Thanks for pointing it out, but he now has less credibility than before.
Shame on him.

neversink

OOPS… At the top of the review he claims he doesn’t know what cards are in the D4s, but down in the spec section he claims one XQD and one CF slot and and in parentheses he says not two CF slots. Go figure.

AM

He also says that the new 35mm f/1.8G is in his no-buy list because probably it’s manufactured in China (he’s not sure). But then in his review, he says that his copy is this or that, or feels like this, etc. LOL.
Typical bluffs from him.

Tony

Interestingly the card door on his (supposed) D4s looks exactly like that on the D4, whereas the real D4s has a reshaped card door (see the post by broxibear).

TheInconvenientRuth

They had to reshape it to make space for three QXD slots…

Michal

this is the best part “I usually set my D4s down to its medium (9MP, 3,696 x 2,456 pixel) resolution anyway to speed up my post processing”

is he processing his files on a 1990’s toaster or what ?

Michiel953

KR did say 24mp; haven’t seen that mentioned anywhere.

Michiel953

KR did say 24mp; haven’t seen that mentioned anywhere.

Captain Megaton

“Hi, we”d like to announce we are working on an updated model, but we can’t tell you anything about it at this time except that we’re working on it.”

I wonder what strategic thinking was at work here: just some free publicity at CES, or perhaps as an assurance to the photojournalist types thinking of booking tickets to the winter Olympics?

SkyMeow

I think it’s actual quite common. Look at the TV announcements. Most of them barely gave us any useful info, no detail spec (most likely haven’t finalized), no price, and no release date.

Bob L

If you look closely at the photos of the rear of the D4s you will notice that Nikon has put dimples on the 2 buttons use to move the focus center point. For D4 owners out there, will these dimples make it easier to use these buttons?

Michiel953

Waddayou think???

Bob L

I hope Nikon corrected the greenish tone of the view screen!

Guy With-camera

Maybe a d800s version is in the works? Or perhaps a dfs with video?

broxibear

Hi Guy With-camera,
I haven’t heard anything about a D800s, but it would make a lot of people happy if Nikon just took a D800 and changed two things…switch the sensor for the D4 sensor and stuck an “S” next to the “800”…nothing else changed.
A true D700 repalcement.

broxibear

Looking at the back of the D4 magnesium alloy body, it looks as if the shape of the slots are actually part of the magnesium shell, not a seperate part.

Changing the XQD/CF arrangement would involve a new body design.
The fact that the D4s shows a different shaped cover means they have changed it, the new D4s cover wouldn’t fit into this D4 shell, the top left portin wiuld have to be cut out ?

RRRoger

If the Expeed 4 processor and Sensor tweaks on the D4s
produce the same gains as they did on the D5300 from the D5200,
we can expect a new High ISO king.
It should be as usable at 51200 as the D4 is at 12,800
I would expect the shooting speed to go up one or two fps also.

I hope those “unchanged” card slots now fully support XQD s and CF (PCI)
It would be very cool if they developed two PCIe sockets that accept both cards.